Paxton returns to joint resolution

Rejecting the so-called “blue sheet” assessment and
reversing its own previous decision, the select board Monday
voted 2-1 to support a joint resolution recommending
far less than their previously approved 7 percent increase to
the school budget.

The budget will be addressed at an August 9 special
town meeting.

Chair Fred Goodrich and clerk Jack Malone voted to
support a figure that returns to a formula recommended by
Holden selectman Joseph Sullivan earlier this year. Sullivan’s
resolution calls for the towns and schools to pursue
budgets that stay within the constraints of the tax levy plus
a 2.5 percent increase. Any increases beyond that would be
subject to a Proposition 2 1/2 override.

Malone led the charge to reverse Paxton’s previous recommendation
supporting a more than 7 percent increase to
the school budget, a figure the town had said it could afford
and which the finance committee suggested. He said the
actions of the school committee at a July 14 meeting with
town officials influenced his decision to return to a lower
figure.

“We showed up [at the meeting] in good faith for what
I thought was going to be a negotiation,” Malone told Paxton
school representative, and committee chair, Alice Livdahl.

After a school committee vote to advance the so-called
blue sheet, a lower figure but one with a total that’s still
higher than the original budget, Malone said school committee
members began to leave the meeting, effectively
ending negotiations while the towns were discussing the
offer.

“You lost your quorum,” Malone told Livdahl.

Livdahl defended the actions of the committee, saying
the blue sheet numbers were close to those offered by the
towns at the meeting (see related story, page one).

“I do not think that the towns put a clear position on the
table,” she said.

She said a budget that includes only a 2.5 percent
increase would result in layoffs.

“You left us no choice,” Malone said. “Your committee
walked out. It was done, it was over.”
Down to the RASA

In the avalanche of numbers that characterizes budget
discussions, only one figure is now actually under discussion,
the towns’ RASA — regional agreement spending
assessment. The amount is assessed over and above what
state law mandates the towns contribute. For Paxton a
fixed expense of $3,970,139 is what the state — and debt
contracts — dictate the town must pay.

A RASA of anywhere from $261,748 to $577,690 has
been under discussion since budget negotiations began.

An original school committee budget would have
required $577,690 in RASA from Paxton. Like several
district towns, Paxton officials said they couldn’t afford
that increase, and eventually approved a 7 percent RASA
hike of $384,858.

After increased state aid numbers were finalized and
RASA figures were rejected or passed over at the region’s
annual town meetings, the school committee proposed a
new budget figure — the so-called “pink sheet — on June
27. The budget used some of the increased state aid to
reduce the towns’ assessments, but was not without controversy:

the reduction did not meet several towns’ expectations,
and the rest of the state aid was used to increase
the bottom line budget from $60.1 million to $60.5 million.

At the July 14 negotiation session, the school committee
opted to approve a second proposal, the “blue sheet,”
which further reduced assessments, making Paxton’s
RASA $394,305, just $9,447 more than the town said it
could afford without an override.

But Goodrich agreed with Malone that the school committee
exhibited a lack of consideration for the towns’
position, which made him lean toward returning to the
joint resolution RASA of $261,748.

Livdahl said the committee did carefully consider the
joint resolution proposal. She took issue with the notion
that the committee didn’t understand the budget, and said
she personally did not support increasing the bottom line
from the original $60.1 million figure of last May, but that
school Superintendent Dr. Alfred Tutela had been very
persuasive. The blue sheet budget also depletes the district’s
Excess and Deficiency fund, similar to the towns’
stabilization funds, she noted.

Livdahl said she would be willing to call a special
meeting of the school committee, though she doubted she
could convince them to support a budget that included
only a 2.5 percent increase.

Chair Mike Quinlivan was the only dissenting vote on
the committee.

“I’m not willing to throw out months of work because
someone walked out of a meeting,” Quinlivan said.

Finance committee member Chris de Marcken gave a
general outline of the fincom view.

“We feel the school committee is playing games,” de
Marcken said. “They’re antagonizing everybody.”

For that reason, he said, the fincom could reach the
point of supporting only the joint resolution as well.

But de Marcken pointed
out that the committee’s
role is only advisory.

Voters at town meeting
will have to decide.
August 9 meeting

The joint resolution
might not be the only
point of solidarity
between the towns. Paxton
voted Monday to hold
its town meeting to vote
on the RASA figure on
August 9, the date agreed
upon by towns at the
working group meeting on
July 7. All five towns’
select boards have now
approved that date.

Goodrich said the
towns will have to consider
both the pink and blue
sheet budgets at town
meeting in order to avoid
approving the pink sheet.
He said he had consulted
town counsel and school
committee counsel about
the fact that the school
committee did not rescind
the pink budget but only
approved the blue budget,
leaving both on the table.
If towns don’t vote within
45 days on the pink budget,
it will be “constructively
approved,” he said.

Livdahl said she
would consult her notes
of the July 14 meeting
and speak with town
counsel. If the committee
rescinds the pink budget
before August 9, it will be
official withdrawn on
town meeting floor.